Changes in Profile after Orthognatic Surgery in Skeletal Class III Patients

Himawan Halim¹, Ivan Halim²

¹Trisakti University, Jakarta, Indonesia.
²Arizona School of Dentistry & Oral Health, A.T. Still University, Mesa, Arizona, USA.

DOI: 10.4236/ojst.2015.512038                

Abstract

Background: Treatment of skeletal Class III malocclusion in growing patient with an anterior crossbite and open bite is challenging due to unpredictable results and potentially unfavorable growth. Growth modification in adult patients is not an alternative approach. Objective: Case report of a patient with Class III malocclusion in adult and anterior crossbite and open bite was treated with combine fixed appliances and orthognatic surgery. Treatment procedure: Treatment of anterior cross bite and open bite was completed in two phases. The first phase was to correct the dental alignment align and arch coordination with fixed orthodontic appliance. The second phase was to correct the skeletal discrepancy with orthognatic surgery. Conclusions: Orthognatic surgery is a good approach in treating anterior cross bite and open bite relating to skeletal problems in adult period. Changes in profile and occlusion were very obvious.

Keywords

Malocclusion, Orthognatic Surgery

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

[1]	Daskaloganinakis, J. (2000) Glossary of Orthodontic Terms. Vol. 1, Quintessence Publishing, Berlin.
[2]	Bhalajhi, S.I. (2006) Orthodontics: The Art and Science. 3rd Edition, Arya (Medi) Publishing House, New Delhi.
[3]	Vaughn, G.A., Mason, B., Moon, H.B. and Turley, P.K. (2005) The Effects of Maxillary Protraction Therapy with or without Rapid Palatinal Expansion: A Prospective, Randomized Clinical Trial. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, 128, 299-309. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2005.04.030
[4]	Profitt, W.R., Fields Jr., H.W. and Sarver, D.M. (2007) Contemporary Orthodontics. 4th Edition, Mosby Elsevier, St. Louis.
[5]	Keles, A., Tokmak, E.C., Erverdi, N. and Nanda, R. (2002) Effect of Varying the Force Direction on Maxillary Orthopedic Protraction. Angle Orthodontist, 72, 387-396.
[6]	Gallagher, R.W., Miranda, F. and Buschang, P.H. (1998) Maxillary Protraction: Treatment and Post Treatment Effects. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, 113, 612-619. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0889-5406(98)70220-3
[7]	Kim, J.H., Viana, M.A.G., Graber, T.M., Omerza, F.F. and BeGole, E. (1999) The Effectiveness of Protraction Face Mask Therapy: A Meta Analysis. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, 115, 675-685. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0889-5406(99)70294-5
[8]	McNamara, J.A. and Brudon, W.L. (2001) Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics. Needham Press Inc, Ann Arbor.
[9]	Choi, S.H., Kang, D.Y., Kim, Y.H. and Hwang, C.J. (2014) Severe Skeletal Class III Malocclusion Treated with 2-Stage Orthognathic Surgery with a Mandibular Step Osteotomy. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, 145, S125-S135. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2013.07.017
[10]	Gerzanic, L., Jagsch, R. and Watzke, I.M. (2002) Psychologic Implications of Orthognathic Surgery in Patients with Skeletal Class II or Class III Malocclusions. International Journal of Adult Orthodontics and Orthognathic Surgery, 17, 75-81.
[11]	Kanako, A., Mitsuhiko, K., Junji, S., Mikako, U. and Hideo, M. (1996) The Effects of Orthognathic Surgery on the Speech Function in Adult Skeletal Class III Patients—Analysis of the Pattern of Tongue Contact, Mandibular Movement and Quality of Speech Sounds. J Jpn Orthod Soc, 55, 387-396.
[12]	Asada, K., Motoyoshi, M., Tamura, T., Nakajima, A., Mayahara, K. and Shimizu, N. (2015) Satisfaction with Orthognathic Surgery of Skeletal Class III Patients. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, 148, 827-837. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2015.05.021